NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 7669036" data-attributes="member: 7006">Who I'd really would love to see posting about this topic are the people who played and enjoyed 4E as a game but still consider 4E a failure (in either design or financial concerns)... and the people who didn't like 4E as a game and wouldn't play it, but also think it successfully achieved what it set out to do.Because everyone else who comments always seem to be the people who think 4E was great and was a success, or the people who hated 4E, don't think it was "D&D", and was a complete failure of a game.  And in both cases their views cannot be taken completely objectively.For me personally... I look at all four recent games (3.0, 3.5, Pathfinder & 4E, of which I played three of them) and see success.  Both creatively *and* financially.  All four of these games were popular with a segment of the roleplaying populace, and they all brought new players and returning players to the game.  None of them were met with 100% satisfaction, but none of them were hated by all of the roleplaying population either.  And for the type of game they were trying to design, I can see what they were aiming for and believe they succeeded in their design goals for the most part.  And as far as financially, I consider being able to produce a product that allows you to pay your staff and keep the lights on so that you can then produce MORE product to be a success.  Because that then allows you to pay your staff again and keep the lights on again, so you can then produce more product again... and so on and so on.  That's what a company does.  And all of those games allowed WotC (and the D&D department) to do that.With so many fans of all four of those different games, all of which kept the D&D department of Wizards of the Coast going and not being shut down... why anyone would consider any of them a "failure" is beyond me.  But obviously, their metrics for what they consider a success to be different than mine.  I'd just love it if the fact that the person HATED a particular game wasn't so prevalent in their overall claims of whether it was a "failure".</blockquote>

Verification